PDA

View Full Version : Obamacare Day 1


mostpost
10-02-2013, 11:23 PM
http://assets.democrats.org/imgs/email/2013/10/Obamacare_Day1_email_support_01.png
http://assets.democrats.org/imgs/email/2013/10/Obamacare_Day1_email_support_02.jpg
http://assets.democrats.org/imgs/email/2013/10/Obamacare_Day1_email_support_03.jpg
http://assets.democrats.org/imgs/email/2013/10/Obamacare_Day1_email_support_04.jpg
http://assets.democrats.org/imgs/email/2013/10/Obamacare_Day1_email_support_05.jpg
http://assets.democrats.org/imgs/email/2013/10/Obamacare_Day1_email_support_06.jpg
http://assets.democrats.org/imgs/email/2013/10/Obamacare_Day1_email_support_07.jpg
http://assets.democrats.org/imgs/email/2013/10/Obamacare_Day1_email_support_08.jpg

And the hits just keep on coming.

Greyfox
10-02-2013, 11:33 PM
EXCLUSIVE: Less than 1 per cent of Web visitors are signing up for Obamacare on some state health exchange websites

California's program registered an estimated 0.58 per cent of website visitors in its first day
A Connecticut congressman boasted that his state took 167 applications for Obamacare services on day one, a rate of 0.59 per cent
Obama administration won't say how many Americans signed up on the central website that covered insurance exchanges for 36 states
Kentucky's 5.3 per cent application rate seems to be the nation's highest

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2442115/EXCLUSIVE-Less-1-cent-Web-visitors-signing-Obamacare-state-health-exchange-websites.html#ixzz2gctP2qZf
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=MailOnline) | DailyMail on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail)

lamboguy
10-02-2013, 11:39 PM
if you are healthy before you get on this website, you will become sick, if you are sick, you will get sicker.

this plan is nothing close to the one in Mass. i spoke to a gal with a pre-existing condition that didn't have insurance. she makes $45,000 per year. she applied for health insurance. they offered her a plan that will cost her $697 per month and the first $14, 840 is uncovered. the lady worked out the numbers and figured that she has to pay her income, state and social security taxes will run her $15,000 per year, her new health insurance premium will be about $8400 and the first $14,840 in benefits comes out of her pocket. she figured out the plan would bankrupt her. so she decided against signing up. she then got an e-mail saying that she is now subject to a $4200 per year penalty for accepting this plan. if she doesn't pay the $4000 she was explained how they will get her money by attaching her paycheck. if she now decides now not to work, they are going to take her house away from her. if she has to go to a doctor or hospital, they will now go through the same process as the IRS to collect their money.

maybe this is a glitch in the system, but to me it sounds like a scam to score the lady's house and clean her out.

newtothegame
10-02-2013, 11:41 PM
You would think that mosty is somehow trying to imply that visits equates to sign ups.....
Those are some might big numbers .....lmao

But, hidden in there is that very small number of actual people on the dole.....lmao

mostpost
10-03-2013, 12:32 AM
EXCLUSIVE: Less than 1 per cent of Web visitors are signing up for Obamacare on some state health exchange websites

California's program registered an estimated 0.58 per cent of website visitors in its first day
A Connecticut congressman boasted that his state took 167 applications for Obamacare services on day one, a rate of 0.59 per cent
Obama administration won't say how many Americans signed up on the central website that covered insurance exchanges for 36 states
Kentucky's 5.3 per cent application rate seems to be the nation's highest

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2442115/EXCLUSIVE-Less-1-cent-Web-visitors-signing-Obamacare-state-health-exchange-websites.html#ixzz2gctP2qZf
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=MailOnline) | DailyMail on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail)

A visitor to a website is anyone who logs on to that website's home page. Many people who logged on were informed there were long wait times. People left and kept coming back because they wanted to sign up. Calculating a percentage from total visitors is foolish. The percentage of people who signed up is the number of people who filled out applications divided by the number of people who reached the page where they could analyze their options. The people who were unable to reach that page are irrelevant to this discussion.

I tried to figure out how they got the 0.58 sign up rate for California and I could not do it. It almost seems as if they took each of the eight websites for companies offering coverage on Covered California and if the customer did not sign up to that company, the counted that as a non signer. So if the customer rejected seven companies and signed with an eighth that was a 12.5% sign up rate. In truth it is 100%.

Basically, I don't believe anything the Daily Mail says.

JustRalph
10-03-2013, 12:33 AM
Lambo.......stop posting Anecdotal info............ ;)


Mostie.....you forgot about Louisiana ........... not one sign up.........

mostpost
10-03-2013, 12:38 AM
if you are healthy before you get on this website, you will become sick, if you are sick, you will get sicker.

this plan is nothing close to the one in Mass. i spoke to a gal with a pre-existing condition that didn't have insurance. she makes $45,000 per year. she applied for health insurance. they offered her a plan that will cost her $697 per month and the first $14, 840 is uncovered. the lady worked out the numbers and figured that she has to pay her income, state and social security taxes will run her $15,000 per year, her new health insurance premium will be about $8400 and the first $14,840 in benefits comes out of her pocket. she figured out the plan would bankrupt her. so she decided against signing up. she then got an e-mail saying that she is now subject to a $4200 per year penalty for accepting this plan. if she doesn't pay the $4000 she was explained how they will get her money by attaching her paycheck. if she now decides now not to work, they are going to take her house away from her. if she has to go to a doctor or hospital, they will now go through the same process as the IRS to collect their money.

maybe this is a glitch in the system, but to me it sounds like a scam to score the lady's house and clean her out.

Does this have anything to do with Obamacare or the newly opened Health Care exchanges? I very much doubt it. So why are you posting it here in a thread about Obamacare?

lamboguy
10-03-2013, 12:46 AM
Does this have anything to do with Obamacare or the newly opened Health Care exchanges? I very much doubt it. So why are you posting it here in a thread about Obamacare?
this lady had no insurance to start out with, she went on healthcare.gov and got directed to an exchange.

mostpost
10-03-2013, 12:47 AM
Lambo.......stop posting Anecdotal info............ ;)


Mostie.....you forgot about Louisiana ........... not one sign up.........
It's not just anecdotal; it's irrelevant. It is impossible the woman could have signed up on the exchanges, taken the time to figure her other expenses, decided not to take to take the insurance, inform the company of her decision and receive the companies threats in one day.

Not only that but the premiums, deductible and out of pocket costs do not match up with the rules of Obamacare.

This did not happen yesterday or today on the exchanges. It happened weeks or months ago in the private insurance area.

TJDave
10-03-2013, 12:56 AM
if you are healthy before you get on this website, you will become sick, if you are sick, you will get sicker.

this plan is nothing close to the one in Mass. i spoke to a gal with a pre-existing condition that didn't have insurance. she makes $45,000 per year. she applied for health insurance. they offered her a plan that will cost her $697 per month and the first $14, 840 is uncovered. the lady worked out the numbers and figured that she has to pay her income, state and social security taxes will run her $15,000 per year, her new health insurance premium will be about $8400 and the first $14,840 in benefits comes out of her pocket. she figured out the plan would bankrupt her. so she decided against signing up. she then got an e-mail saying that she is now subject to a $4200 per year penalty for accepting this plan. if she doesn't pay the $4000 she was explained how they will get her money by attaching her paycheck. if she now decides now not to work, they are going to take her house away from her. if she has to go to a doctor or hospital, they will now go through the same process as the IRS to collect their money.

maybe this is a glitch in the system, but to me it sounds like a scam to score the lady's house and clean her out.

One of my regular foursome is a retired executive for Eisenhower medical center. He tells me with Obama-care at least the hospitals can recover some costs. The bottom tier plan covers 60%...which is better than nothing. Drug companies are already ramping up prices so they can cut them when the plans roll out. ;)

What do you think would have happened to this lady without the affordable care act? She would get care anyway and it would be 100% on your's and my nickle.

JustRalph
10-03-2013, 01:00 AM
I tried to figure out how they got the 0.58 sign up rate for California and I could not do it.

You couldn't figure it out because it was another GOD DAMN LIE! You SOB's can't do anything without lying about it.

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-california-health-exchange-glitches-20131001,0,7108713.story

California exchange overstated its Web traffic for Obamacare launch

"California's health insurance exchange vastly overstated the number of online hits it received Tuesday during the rollout of Obamacare.

State officials said the Covered California website got 645,000 hits during the first day of enrollment, far fewer than the 5 million it reported Tuesday.

The state exchange had cited the 5 million figure as a sign of strong consumer interest and a major reason people had so much difficulty using its $313-million online enrollment system.

Dana Howard, a spokesman for Covered California, said the error was the result of internal miscommunication.

"Someone misspoke and thought it was indeed 5 million hits. That was incorrect," he said. "

johnhannibalsmith
10-03-2013, 01:36 AM
There are 8,239,361,003 users participating in this forum.

Greyfox
10-03-2013, 01:38 AM
Basically, I don't believe anything the Daily Mail says.

At least the Daily Mail identifies itself.
That b.s. first post of yours has no identifying marks with respect to source.
Who are you shilling for here Mostie???

mostpost
10-03-2013, 01:40 AM
You couldn't figure it out because it was another GOD DAMN LIE! You SOB's can't do anything without lying about it.

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-california-health-exchange-glitches-20131001,0,7108713.story

California exchange overstated its Web traffic for Obamacare launch

"California's health insurance exchange vastly overstated the number of online hits it received Tuesday during the rollout of Obamacare.

State officials said the Covered California website got 645,000 hits during the first day of enrollment, far fewer than the 5 million it reported Tuesday.

The state exchange had cited the 5 million figure as a sign of strong consumer interest and a major reason people had so much difficulty using its $313-million online enrollment system.

Dana Howard, a spokesman for Covered California, said the error was the result of internal miscommunication.

"Someone misspoke and thought it was indeed 5 million hits. That was incorrect," he said. "
You need to take anger management classes. It was not a lie. It was an error. If it had been a lie, they would not have corrected it. They issued a correction because they wanted the correct information to be known.

When I think about it, I should have realized that figure was wrong. I had previously seen that healthcare.gov had received 6 million hits over the two days. It was quite unlikely California would get 5 Million.

645,000 is a remarkable number. 514,000 unique visitors is also a remarkable number. It means one out of every 78 Californians visited the site.

JustRalph
10-03-2013, 01:41 AM
At least the Daily Mail identifies itself.
That b.s. first post of yours has no identifying marks with respect to source.
Who are you shilling for here Mostie???

the pic url

assets.democrats.org

for a minute I thought it said "asshats"

mostpost
10-03-2013, 01:47 AM
At least the Daily Mail identifies itself.
That b.s. first post of yours has no identifying marks with respect to source.
Who are you shilling for here Mostie???
It's the same folks who provided the cool graphic in the "It's working" thread.
assets.democrats.org.
Sorry, I should have noted that.
ETA: I see JR has also answered your question.

JustRalph
10-03-2013, 01:52 AM
You need to take anger management classes.

nope, just replying in kind. You and your buddies have been calling names and getting personal around here for the last few months. Don't like it so much when you get it back?

Get used to it. You want to play that game, we can play..........

mostpost
10-03-2013, 01:58 AM
One of my regular foursome is a retired executive for Eisenhower medical center. He tells me with Obama-care at least the hospitals can recover some costs. The bottom tier plan covers 60%...which is better than nothing. Drug companies are already ramping up prices so they can cut them when the plans roll out. ;)

What do you think would have happened to this lady without the affordable care act? She would get care anyway and it would be 100% on your's and my nickle.
I do not wish to be unkind to Lamboguy, but his story does not pass the smell test. He claims the lady has to pay the first $14,840 of her medical expenses. Yet the Affordable Care Act caps annual expenses at $6300 for a single person.
Maybe the deductible is not included in that $6300, but every plan that I've seen has deductibles much lower than $14,840-two thirds lower or more.

Another thing is that almost every state-if not every state-has a buyers remorse law. Usually a three business day period in which a person can cancel a contract. If the lady was beyond that three day grace period, she did not get the insurance through the exchanges.

mostpost
10-03-2013, 02:12 AM
I looked up buyers remorse laws and found this:
The Federal Trade Commission has a rule that applies to every state in the United States when it comes to buyer's remorse. This is known as the three-day cooling-off period. With this rule, buyers have three days before a purchase becomes binding. If the customer wants to get out of the purchase some time before the three business day window, he can do so without consequence. This rule does not apply to car purchases or to items under $25.

If the lady did indeed purchase the insurance yesterday on the exchange, she should be able to void the purchase. I would suggest a lawyer. If she did not buy it on the exchange or if the whole story is apocryphal that is another matter all together

JustRalph
10-03-2013, 02:30 AM
http://www.infowars.com/obamacare-fines-to-be-seized-from-bank-accounts/

Lambo, sounds similar to this guy............

hcap
10-03-2013, 03:43 AM
http://www.infowars.com/obamacare-fines-to-be-seized-from-bank-accounts/

Lambo, sounds similar to this guy............Daily Caller, InfoWars? What's next? The JR/TOM B News Corp? :) :)

newtothegame
10-03-2013, 04:05 AM
Daily Caller, InfoWars? What's next? The JR/TOM B News Corp? :) :)

Not much different then J carney :lol:

JustRalph
10-03-2013, 07:36 AM
Daily Caller, InfoWars? What's next? The JR/TOM B News Corp? :) :)

should I remind you of the John Edwards thread............... :lol:

Tom
10-03-2013, 10:27 AM
There are 8,239,361,003 users participating in this forum.

And how many have health care?

Dave Schwartz
10-03-2013, 11:27 AM
I went to http://info.nevadahealthlink.com/ again today. Have been there several times. Every time I go the description of the plans has changed.

Two weeks ago, they said that there were 4 tiers - and that the co-pays were 40%, 30%, 20% and 10%. Now they say that the lowest co-pay is 20%.

There is a calculator on the front page. If you punch in $50k per year and family of 2, you will find a FAMILY premium slightly under $400 per month. However, this is for the cheapest plan. No clue what the better plans will cost.

I would say that for age 55+ (I am 62, wife is 58) this will actually be a very good deal. Bad news? How this country will pay for it is another question. If I was 35 I would simply pay the tax.

Dave Schwartz
10-03-2013, 12:14 PM
Just had a great conversation with a health rep selling the exchange in Nevada. (We had an appointment today but he is swamped so we did a call instead.)

Here is what I found out:

First, it seems that income for a self-employed person is based upon gross REVENUE! That means ANYONE who is in business for themselves will be "market price."

"Market Price" rates are not yet available.

There are 4 tiers, based upon deductible: 40%, 30%, 20% and 10% co-pay. The only rate quotes available are 20%.

All 4 tiers have the same out-of-pocket cap (around $6k per individual I think).

Apparently there is dental coverage but the only Federal requirement is that there IS dental coverage. There are no rules for what must be covered and the plans are terrible.

The paper application is 45 pages long. The internet application is much simpler. (This is in Nevada; your mileage may differ.)

Anecdotally, the agent said the only people trying to sign up now are older people and those with pre-existing conditions.

Sign up rules: You must sign up before the deadline or else you must wait until 2015 to sign up again. In other words, the idea that you will "just pay the tax and get the insurance when you need it," could cause you to wait until the following Jan. 1 to get coverage.

Greyfox
10-03-2013, 12:27 PM
:

First, it seems that income for a self-employed person is based upon gross REVENUE! .

Wow.
Gross Revenue?? :rolleyes:
A guy could take in a lot of money but if his expenses are high he could be starving.

johnhannibalsmith
10-03-2013, 12:28 PM
First, it seems that income for a self-employed person is based upon gross REVENUE! ...

:confused:

So, for the sake of a pertinent query...

If I train 10 racehorses and charge $50 a day, bill around $2,000 a month per horse, and $1,800 of that goes to overhead -- giving me $2,000 in total monthly income and $24,000 annually -- they instead want to base the rate on the $240,000 figure?

rastajenk
10-03-2013, 12:31 PM
At "market price," I'd rather have lobster, please. :p

TJDave
10-03-2013, 12:35 PM
First, it seems that income for a self-employed person is based upon gross REVENUE! That means ANYONE who is in business for themselves will be "market price."


How does this differ from those salaried?

Are they allowed to take a standard deduction?

Dave Schwartz
10-03-2013, 12:44 PM
It is far different.

If a business sells $100,000 worth of product and makes $10,000 per year the gross income is $100,000.

Kind of like racing in MA: You are taxed on total win instead of NET RESULT.

TJDave
10-03-2013, 12:56 PM
It is far different.

If a business sells $100,000 worth of product and makes $10,000 per year the gross income is $100,000.

Kind of like racing in MA: You are taxed on total win instead of NET RESULT.

I understand. My question was whether salaried applicants are treated differently. Are they allowed to claim deductions, standard or itemized to arrive at a base?

I assume you are a sole proprietorship?

You might want to consider incorporation and pay yourself an appropriate salary.

BTW, there are tax benefits under the ACA for businesses with less than 5 employees.

lamboguy
10-03-2013, 01:27 PM
this whole fiasco is predicated on young suckers paying $400 a month for premiums to subsidize the people that get sick. the penalty for the young people is only $95 per year. if the young healthy person gets sick without insurance, he can get the insurance on the spot and be covered for his sickness or accident.

which young people does anyone know who are going to pay $4800 a year for nothing but thin air?

Stillriledup
10-03-2013, 01:29 PM
if you are healthy before you get on this website, you will become sick, if you are sick, you will get sicker.

this plan is nothing close to the one in Mass. i spoke to a gal with a pre-existing condition that didn't have insurance. she makes $45,000 per year. she applied for health insurance. they offered her a plan that will cost her $697 per month and the first $14, 840 is uncovered. the lady worked out the numbers and figured that she has to pay her income, state and social security taxes will run her $15,000 per year, her new health insurance premium will be about $8400 and the first $14,840 in benefits comes out of her pocket. she figured out the plan would bankrupt her. so she decided against signing up. she then got an e-mail saying that she is now subject to a $4200 per year penalty for accepting this plan. if she doesn't pay the $4000 she was explained how they will get her money by attaching her paycheck. if she now decides now not to work, they are going to take her house away from her. if she has to go to a doctor or hospital, they will now go through the same process as the IRS to collect their money.

maybe this is a glitch in the system, but to me it sounds like a scam to score the lady's house and clean her out.

Maybe she went to the website for UNAFFORDABLE health care instead of the one that's affordable?

jballscalls
10-03-2013, 01:44 PM
this whole fiasco is predicated on young suckers paying $400 a month for premiums to subsidize the people that get sick. the penalty for the young people is only $95 per year. if the young healthy person gets sick without insurance, he can get the insurance on the spot and be covered for his sickness or accident.

which young people does anyone know who are going to pay $4800 a year for nothing but thin air?

As a 33 year old, I looked and although I don't qualify for financial assistance, the rates are cheaper than what I'm paying now and the deductible and out of pocket are lower for the gold and silver plans.

I'll likely be purchasing insurance off the exchange as i'm an independent worker and it appears it will save me $ and improve my level of coverage.

Be curious to hear others experiences as we get closer to implementation.

TJDave
10-03-2013, 01:50 PM
BTW, there are tax benefits under the ACA for businesses with less than 5 employees.

Sorry, that should be less than 25 employees.

HUSKER55
10-03-2013, 02:54 PM
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/10/03/mcafee-antivirus-founder-what-idiot-put-this-system-out-there/


I am not a programmer so I depend on the companies that write the protection programs.

I think you should at least read this and be aware.

dartman51
10-03-2013, 02:55 PM
the pic url

assets.democrats.org

for a minute I thought it said "asshats"

:lol: You were right the first time. :D

hcap
10-03-2013, 03:19 PM
should I remind you of the John Edwards thread............... :lol:Please do :)

Jay Trotter
10-03-2013, 05:29 PM
As a 33 year old, I looked and although I don't qualify for financial assistance, the rates are cheaper than what I'm paying now and the deductible and out of pocket are lower for the gold and silver plans.

I'll likely be purchasing insurance off the exchange as i'm an independent worker and it appears it will save me $ and improve my level of coverage.

Be curious to hear others experiences as we get closer to implementation.What!!!! This can't possibly be true. :faint:

JustRalph
10-03-2013, 08:27 PM
What!!!! This can't possibly be true. :faint:

why can't it be true.......it's a wealth transfer......some kid is picking up his tab

mostpost
10-03-2013, 08:37 PM
this whole fiasco is predicated on young suckers paying $400 a month for premiums to subsidize the people that get sick. the penalty for the young people is only $95 per year. if the young healthy person gets sick without insurance, he can get the insurance on the spot and be covered for his sickness or accident.

which young people does anyone know who are going to pay $4800 a year for nothing but thin air?
This post contradicts your post #3 in which you claimed that a woman was going to have to pay a $4200 a year fine. Which is it? $95 a year or $4200 a year? The fact is a person who does not have insurance who makes $45,000 a year will pay a maximum fine of $1175 or 2.5% of their annual income.

mostpost
10-03-2013, 08:39 PM
why can't it be true.......it's a wealth transfer......some kid is picking up his tab
He is a young kid. He's thirty three.

mostpost
10-03-2013, 08:46 PM
this whole fiasco is predicated on young suckers paying $400 a month for premiums to subsidize the people that get sick. the penalty for the young people is only $95 per year. if the young healthy person gets sick without insurance, he can get the insurance on the spot and be covered for his sickness or accident.

which young people does anyone know who are going to pay $4800 a year for nothing but thin air?
I continue to be astounded at how you people think; or rather don't think. You pay insurance premiums so that you are covered if or when you get sick. You're not subsidizing anyone because they are also paying premiums. If they are older than you, it means they have been paying premiums a lot longer than you.

The people who are looking for something for nothing are those who never had insurance, then start to pay premiums when they get older and expect the insurance company to pay for expensive treatments.

Tom
10-03-2013, 08:57 PM
No, mostie, it is a tax, remember, the ONLY way it is legal is if it is a tax.
It is not insurance by any stretch of the imagination.

mostpost
10-03-2013, 09:13 PM
No, mostie, it is a tax, remember, the ONLY way it is legal is if it is a tax.
It is not insurance by any stretch of the imagination.
Another example of someone not thinking. You. I was talking about premiums paid to insurance companies. When you pay a premium you are providing that you will be able to pay for treatment should you become ill. You are also helping to provide that others in your insurance pool will be able to pay for treatment if they become ill. They are doing the same for you. That is a premium, not a tax. It goes to an insurance company, not the government.

The Supreme Court did not say that premiums paid under Obamacare were a tax. The tax was the penalty paid for not having insurance.

Jay Trotter
10-03-2013, 09:14 PM
why can't it be true.......it's a wealth transfer......some kid is picking up his tabReally? Is this the same way private insurance companies work too?

lamboguy
10-03-2013, 09:19 PM
I continue to be astounded at how you people think; or rather don't think. You pay insurance premiums so that you are covered if or when you get sick. You're not subsidizing anyone because they are also paying premiums. If they are older than you, it means they have been paying premiums a lot longer than you.

The people who are looking for something for nothing are those who never had insurance, then start to pay premiums when they get older and expect the insurance company to pay for expensive treatments.i don;t think you understand how this game is being played. the organization that is in charge of running the show is the IRS, they are the greatest collection agency known to man. they have more powers to collect money than anyone else alive in this country. they are going to wind up with peoples houses, cars, bank accounts and whatever assets they can get their hands on. this is a hustle and the guys running the scheme will never go to the can.

mostpost
10-03-2013, 09:57 PM
i don;t think you understand how this game is being played. the organization that is in charge of running the show is the IRS, they are the greatest collection agency known to man. they have more powers to collect money than anyone else alive in this country. they are going to wind up with peoples houses, cars, bank accounts and whatever assets they can get their hands on. this is a hustle and the guys running the scheme will never go to the can.
I can't argue with you. It is impossible to argue with someone who is not rational.

Tom
10-03-2013, 10:10 PM
Really? Is this the same way private insurance companies work too?

No.
Provate insuirance companies offer insurance.
This is not insurance.
With insuracne, you are making a bet.

You understand how bets work, right?
Only the winners get paid?

And with private insuracne, NO ONE is forced to participate.

Tom
10-03-2013, 10:11 PM
I can't argue with you. It is impossible to argue with someone who is not rational.

I am sure lambo has figure that out by now! :lol: :lol:

PaceAdvantage
10-03-2013, 10:12 PM
I continue to be astounded at how you people think;What do you mean by "you people?"

Don't tell me you're lumping lamboguy into the whole "rightie" mix simply because of what he wrote in this thread...

Such shallowness on your part...I'm shocked...shocked I say...

PaceAdvantage
10-03-2013, 10:13 PM
I can't argue with you. It is impossible to argue with someone who is not rational.You can say that again...Mr. Pot.

sammy the sage
10-03-2013, 10:14 PM
I can't argue with you. It is impossible to argue with someone who is not rational.

When's the LAST time you looked in a mirror...

Really people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones... :lol:

JustRalph
10-03-2013, 10:18 PM
Really? Is this the same way private insurance companies work too?

No. Young people are being forced into the pools. Never before has that happen.

20 yr olds aren't forced to buy high priced insurance ( or they weren't)
To support 35 yr olds and above. They are now, under the guise of a tax.

I know 20 something's who have stated to me personally that they aren't going to buy insurance. They don't have it and have turned down work related policies. one of them told me that the minute she needs it, then she will buy it. Obamacare allows that. She's 27 and healthy.

She's also a huge Obama supporter. She was staying at my house when she first came to Texas. We talked about this stuff for months. She and her friends care not about penalties etc. they will pay the fines they say

Striker
10-04-2013, 12:01 AM
No. Young people are being forced into the pools. Never before has that happen.

20 yr olds aren't forced to buy high priced insurance ( or they weren't)
To support 35 yr olds and above. They are now, under the guise of a tax.

I know 20 something's who have stated to me personally that they aren't going to buy insurance. They don't have it and have turned down work related policies. one of them told me that the minute she needs it, then she will buy it. Obamacare allows that. She's 27 and healthy.

She's also a huge Obama supporter. She was staying at my house when she first came to Texas. We talked about this stuff for months. She and her friends care not about penalties etc. they will pay the fines they say
Her attitude will certainly change, if god forbid, she gets in a terrible car accident, or she gets an awful disease, which can and does happen to healthy 27 year olds.

JustRalph
10-04-2013, 12:25 AM
Her attitude will certainly change, if god forbid, she gets in a terrible car accident, or she gets an awful disease, which can and does happen to healthy 27 year olds.

had that talk with her over and over. almost talked her into a catastrophic policy once......but she blew it off eventually.

ElKabong
10-04-2013, 01:02 AM
Her attitude will certainly change, if god forbid, she gets in a terrible car accident, or she gets an awful disease, which can and does happen to healthy 27 year olds.

27 yo's don't think in these terms. Many in their 30s don't either

This is a failure waiting to happen. Another well intentioned liberal dream with no proper map out strategy & cannot work given the circumstances and realities. It's such a farking turd, it's as if it couldn't get voted into law. Oh, wait.....It didn't

Talk about people can't think things thru...... the libs backing this act will be blaming Pubbies for its failure in 7-8 years. It's yours, you own it

Dave Schwartz
10-04-2013, 10:37 AM
I know 20 something's who have stated to me personally that they aren't going to buy insurance. They don't have it and have turned down work related policies. one of them told me that the minute she needs it, then she will buy it. Obamacare allows that. She's 27 and healthy.


According to our agent, actually, it doesn't. The enrollment period ends during the first quarter EVERY YEAR. It will allow her to sign up for coverage the following January, though.

Better hope she gets sick at the end of the year.